Which One-Ils or LPV?

Some years ago, I was flying with a pilot in his Cessna. He was instrument rated, while I was working on mine. I watched him enjoying the two perfectly centered needles (old-style CDIs) accompanying the six-pack panel while flying to a VOR at 6000 feet. He remarked with a sigh of contentment, Now this is the way to fly. It sure was, especially for me, when I was building time in budget-friendly trainers where dual (working) CDIs was a luxury.

Elaine Kauh

Monday, January 21, 2019 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

Pilot preferences for navigation technology evolve, shifting from traditional CDI-based systems to modern GPS/HSI setups for simpler, more direct approach procedures.
While modern RNAV/LPV approaches offer significant convenience and automation, traditional ILS approaches can sometimes provide lower minimums, which are critical in marginal weather conditions.
The article illustrates that the specific approach procedure's minimums, rather than just the sophistication of the avionics, can ultimately determine the success of a landing in challenging weather.

See a mistake? Contact us.

Some years ago, I was flying with a pilot in his Cessna. He was instrument rated, while I was working on mine. I watched him enjoying the two perfectly centered needles (old-style CDIs) accompanying the six-pack panel while flying to a VOR at 6000 feet. He remarked with a sigh of contentment, “Now this is the way to fly.” It sure was, especially for me, when I was building time in budget-friendly trainers where dual (working) CDIs was a luxury.

A couple years later, I was flying with this same pilot in his newer, faster Mooney, equipped with a nice HSI coupled to a Garmin GNS 430. While en route to an RNAV fix, he remarked with that same sigh of contentment, “Now this is the way to fly.” Funny how our likes and dislikes can swap ends. This brings us to our latest Clinic: Which approach are you gonna fly?